Mar
30

Fun with Figures




Posted at 16:07 by Tintin
death_by_bathtub.jpg
Another white person killed by a bathtub

The sadly-mistitled website The American Thinker is where the wingnuts who fancy themselves to be really, really smart go to play. So that’s where we find Randall Hoven, an engineer living in the hinterlands of Illinois, pulling out his slide rule to explain why white people are right to poop their pants when they see black people. Statistics show, Randall says with a flourish of the pocket protector, that black people are more likely to be murderers than white people.

That is, the chance of just any person you see on the street murdering someone this year is about 5 of 100,000 (assuming you see a random sample of people). The same chance of a white person is 3.5 of 100,000. And the same chance for a black person is 19.7 of 100,000. That means a black person is 5.6 times more likely than a white person to be a murderer.

It is totally rational for a any person (including Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama’s grandmother) to fear a black person more than a white one. In fact, you should fear them 5.6 times more.

Here are a few more interesting facts you should take into account when determining who and what to be afraid of. You are 65 times more likely to drown in a bathtub than by being bitten by a venomous spider — so it’s totally rational to be afraid of bathtubs. And you are three times more likely to be killed by an acquaintance than a total stranger, so you really need to spend more time with strangers, just to be safe.

And if you write a post like the one that Hoven wrote, you are 356 times more likely to get linked by David Duke.


Gavin adds: Maybe I’m reading these figures wrong here, but Hoven seems to be leaving out the salient, indeed the pivotal — indeed the crucial — matter of who-kills-whom. Because apparently, the best measure you can take to protect yourself from Black-on-X homicide is to be a white person.

Once you do that, though, you need to start fearing the greater number of white murderers who would kill you. Is not life’s larder richly stocked with complexities? I always think so.

123 Comments »

  1. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:26

    Hey. Where’s the Gavin-revised The American Thinker logo page?

  2. Silver Owl said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:31

    Stats also say that 10 of 10 today’s conservatives pull shit out of their asses and consider it brilliant thinking. That’s a genetic mutation that should terrify the whole human race. lol

  3. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:35

    I wonder if someone should let Hoven know that David Duke loved his article. Because it’s important for The American Thinker to keep up non-racist appearances, you know.

  4. His Grace said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:37

    In fact, you should fear them 5.6 times more.

    The bestest reasoning evah!111!!!eleventyone! Does Randall have a handy bar graph handy with the appropriate amounts of fear one should have when meeting a random stranger of a given race? Although, by his reasoning if you don’t fear a random white stranger automatically (and thus assign it a value of zero), your fear of a random black stranger should be also be zero. Somehow I don’t think that’s what he is intending.

  5. Sporkey said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:40

    Using the link that he provided with the statistics he was using (2005), 44.6% of homicides involved white people killing other white people. And, you may ask, what the percentage was of black people killing white people? 8.8%. (If I’m reading it correctly, otherwise it’s the 3.2% number.) Also, that the homicide rate has gone down, at least, until 2004.

    If you’re gonna make shit up, don’t provide the links that prove that you’re just making shit up.

  6. Fats Durston said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:40

    The chance that a high-ranking participant in the corporate world has stolen billions of dollars is 1.7 in 93. The chance that this person is black is .000034 in 10014. You should thus fear Whitey when it comes to felony-level thefts.

    What?

    That’s not criminal activity?

    Nevermind.

  7. El Cid said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:41

    You are also a million times more likely to have your economy f***ed up under Republicans — who go on to proclaim that what we need is even more of the same things which got us into the mess! Believe It, Or Not!

  8. Sporkey said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:41

    Does Randall have a handy bar graph handy with the appropriate amounts of fear one should have when meeting a random stranger of a given race?

    Probably.

  9. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:47

    Does Randall have a handy bar graph handy with the appropriate amounts of fear one should have when meeting a random stranger of a given race?

    He keeps one in his wallet. So during international travel, he can pull it out, match up the skin color (it’s probably a palette) and when someone dangerously colored approaches he can say “This one’s a 7.8, honey, we’d better get out of here.”

  10. Blue Buddha said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:57

    El Cid said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:41

    You are also a million times more likely to have your economy f***ed up under Republicans — who go on to proclaim that what we need is even more of the same things which got us into the mess! Believe It, Or Not!

    When read slowly, I can picture Jack Palance delivering that line.

  11. North Chowderville said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:59

    Hey. Where’s the Gavin-revised The American Thinker logo page?

    ???

  12. Notorious P.A.T. said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:09

    Using the link that he provided with the statistics he was using (2005), 44.6% of homicides involved white people killing other white people. And, you may ask, what the percentage was of black people killing white people? 8.8%.

    Thank you.

  13. Rugosa said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:11

    The 5.6-times figure seems to assume all murder victims are white. I guess that’s why black people don’t mind living in dangerous neighborhoods – they’re safe, it’s just all the white people living there who are in danger.

  14. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:18

    What a load of POOP. The 5.6 figure is meaningless not only for the reasons Clif has outlined, but because in ALL murders you are many times more likely to be murdered by someone you know than someone you don’t know. And since Hoven and his ilk make it a point not to know any black people, that means their odds of being killed by one are considerably less than the odds they’ll be killed by a white person.

    Then again, they hate most white people too.

  15. gbear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:26

    Frank Rich had a pretty good post this morning in the NYT about the outmoded racial attitudes that keep getting dredged up by the talking points boys. Short clip:

    The myth that’s been busted is one that Mr. Obama talked about in his speech — the perennial given that American racial relations are doomed to stew eternally in the Jim Crow poisons that forged generations like Mr. Wright’s. Yet if you sampled much political commentary of the past two weeks, you’d think it’s still 1968, or at least 1988. The default assumptions are that the number of racists in America remains fixed, no matter what the generational turnover, and that the Wright videos will terrorize white folks just as the Willie Horton ads did when the G.O.P. took out Michael Dukakis.

    But politically and culturally we’re not in the 1980s — or pre-YouTube 2004 — anymore. An unending war abroad is upstaging the old domestic racial ghosts. A new bottom-up media culture is challenging any candidate’s control of a message.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/opinion/30rich.html?hp

    I’ll bet that David Duke isn’t going to link to this. Read it and weep, crahcuh.

  16. J— said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:30

    Hoven has an update. It has five points. From #5 (emphases his):

    I did not say it is reasonable to fear blacks. I said it is reasonable to fear blacks more than whites.

    Let’s go back to the original post (emphasis his again):

    It is totally rational for a any person (including Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama’s grandmother) to fear a black person more than a white one. In fact, you should fear them 5.6 times more.

    So it is totally rational to fear a black person more than a white, and one should fear the former 5.6 times more than the latter, but it is not necessary reasonable to do this. It’s all so clear now.

  17. gbear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:32

    It is 23.7 times more likely that I will use this nice spring day to go get an ice cream cone on Grand Avenue (flavor: Black Hills Gold) than I will use it to clean the garage. On another day, those odds might bother me, but not today.

  18. His Grace said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:38

    Hoven has an update. It has five points. From #5 (emphases his):

    I did not say it is reasonable to fear blacks. I said it is reasonable to fear blacks more than whites.

    Man this is getting confusing… A bar graph isn’t gonna cut it for me. Perhaps some sort of flow chart would be useful in figuring out what my reaction toward various ethnicities should be.

  19. Flying Fox said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:39

    I could not find the article, but I remember some time in the past two years, the New York Times ran an article about a study that demonstrated that fifty percent of all murders are criminal killing other criminals. There was even a sentence basically saying “unless you are a criminal (especially one prone to screwing your accomplices) you can be less afraid.”

  20. Gary Ruppert said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:41

    The fact is, big black males at night are scary, especially in gangs. You would not do well to walk up and chat with them if you are white, female and not armed. You would get murdered, raped, pissed on and robbed, very likely. Here in the heartland, we have cracked down on black and hispanic gangs, so it is safer to walk the streets at night, unlike your liberal elite hellholes where you are so tolerant of gangs you subsidize them to give your neigborhoods color and street cred. You liberals disgust us.

  21. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:43

    Hey. Where’s the Gavin-revised The American Thinker logo page?

    ???

    No, not that one. This one.

  22. North Chowderville said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:49

    The wingnut mind: Dialogue on Race = wholesale recycling of discredited racist precepts.

  23. Gary Ruppert said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:53

    The fact is, why don’t the minorities just stop being so angry and defeatest and violent and work harder, get some respect? We’ve given them everything, and they don’t want it. maybe they DON’T deserve it. maybe they ARE inferior, not as intelligent, of such good moral caracter as the whites, who after all are the most powerful race on eart and the most successful.

  24. gbear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:54

    Gary’s only speaking for cracker heartland. We here in the rest of the heartland have an open mind (as in: heads not up asses).

  25. North Chowderville said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:55

    No, not that one. This one.

    Whoa!

    …whew (collecting myself)…

  26. TomMil said,

    March 30, 2008 at 17:56

    I was very surprised to see that the total number of homicides nationwide has gone down significantly. If you look at that chart, about 10 years ago there were between 12k and 14k per year, for the last 5 years or so its down to 9 or 10 thousand.

  27. SomeNYGuy said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:01

    Oh, that chilling shot from Diabollique just made my day! Time to drag out the DVDs for a double feature with Wages of Fear and let my nerves fray like a cheap dish towel.

  28. The Ugly Anti-American said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:02

    I was very surprised to see that the total number of homicides nationwide has gone down significantly.

    These days americans are doing their killing elsewhere.

  29. TomMil said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:05

    These kids today!! Can’t shoot for shit!

  30. D Johnston said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:11

    That update is something else. In point #4, he basically concedes that his whole argument is bullshit. To wit:

    It is true that most whites are killed by other whites and most blacks are killed by other blacks. It is also true that more whites are killed by blacks than blacks are killed by whites . It is also true that many murders are committed by family and acquaintances rather than strangers. But our problem starts with all these factors removed; it is based on the condition of meeting a stranger on the street. I’m willing to assume most people are killed by members of their own race for the simple reason that that is who they around most and most likely to meet.

    In summary: You’re more likely to be killed by someone of your own race that you know than someone of another race that you don’t. However, that’s only because you deal with people of your own race. I’m sure that if we had the stats for it, it would turn out that you met a stranger on the street, you’d be safer if he was white. Y’know, because of how those people are.

    I really wish racists would just admit to being racists rather than trying to use science and statistics to validate their bigotry. This is actually more offensive to me.

  31. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:11

    Teh Clinton Charm Offensive Marches Onward.

  32. paul said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:14

    what’s the old saying? a little knowledge is a dangerous thing?

    how these people get out of bed and dress themselves (assuming they do: are they allowed belts and shoelaces?) is something to ponder.

  33. Hysterical Woman said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:18

    I’ll just stick to be afraid of everyone.

  34. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:24

    MOTHERFUCKER!

    I’ll try this AGAIN for the thirteenth time:

    80% of murder victims killed by family member or acquaintance.

    And of course there’s the statistic that 30% of all murdered women are killed by a boyfriend, husband, or ex. Which means a woman should be about a million times more afraid of the guy sleeping in the bed next to her than she is of random black men on the street. Unless of course the guy sleeping in bed next to her is black, in which her odds of being murdered by him are 100%. Unless she’s a black woman, in which case, her odds of being murdered by him are a lot greater than 100%. Or something like that. I’m sure Hoven could calculate it out for us.

  35. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:27

    Gary, the fact is, here in The Heartland, the “good moral character” of whites includes daughter-raping, animal-fucking, parishioner-molesting, serial-killing, insurance-fraud-scheming, drunk-driving, bank-robbing, meth-making, child-neglecting, shop-lifting, gay-bashing, black-lynching, cop-shooting, and general shitfaced beer-breathed shouting of “Wuuht didjo say ta me, boay?!” behavior that I’m sure you have come to love as much as I do.

    Yes, folks, it’s just fucking awesome here in “The Heartland”.

  36. North Chowderville said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:30

    CC, you forgot guvmint-bldg-bombing…

  37. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:32

    Teh Clinton Charm Offensive Marches Onward.

    Umm…

    That was starkly evident Saturday at one convention in Houston, where mostly white Clinton supporters repeatedly challenged the credentials of black Obama backers in a heavily black district that had voted overwhelmingly for Obama.

    Oh well done.

  38. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:36

    What the fuck is wrong with wordpress?

  39. The Heartland said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:38

    Pay no attention to that Ruppert guy. I’m going to take care of his loser ass one of these fine days.

  40. PaulG said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:39

    Gary, it doesn’t matter how you try to demonize big black guys. Women still aren’t going to talk to you at night or any other time. No matter how you try to slant things, you’re still a loser.

  41. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:39

    Ok, so maybe I’ll try this one last time:

    In 1994, AP reported that the stats on homicide showed that 80% of murder victims were killed by a family member or acquaintance.

    In addition, 30% of all women murdered are killed by a boyfriend, a husband, or an ex. Which means a woman should be about a million times more afraid of the guy sleeping next to her in bed than of a random black man on the street. Unless the guy sleeping next to her in bed is a black guy. In that case, she has a 100% chance of being murdered, and if she’s a black woman, those odds only go up. Or something like that; you’ll have to ask Hoven.

  42. Chlamydia Champaigne said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:41

    CC, you forgot guvmint-bldg-bombing…

    Well, that goes without saying. Along with the black-helicopter-fearing.

  43. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:41

    RIght out of the Rove playbook, RB.

  44. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:45

    It just isn’t that hard for conspiracy theorists to spin the Scaife stuff.

  45. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:52

    Dudes, wordpress is seriously fucked today. I hope that comment with the link from above doesn’t eventually post from the other 12 times it was attempted…if it does my sincere apologies to you all.

    And fuck Hillary. She bleated to the Washington Post yesterday about how she plans to fuck up the convention by making a challenge to the delegate committee to seat the MI and FL delegations, which she agreed before the primary ever began would not count. My hope is that the superdelegates will look at that statement and decide to shut her down now by declaring for Obama and making any complaint about MI and FL a moot point.

  46. tb said,

    March 30, 2008 at 18:54

    I did not say it is reasonable to fear blacks. I said it is reasonable to fear blacks more than whites.

    I’m missing the distinction. The whole point of the post was to say that automatic fear of random black people is rational- “grounded in reason”, he says.

    My calculations were for “everything else equal” except race.

    Therein lies the source of the extreme worthlessness of his ah “calculations”. The only way the statistics can be made to say what he wants them to say is to leave out other important, dare I say critical factors that have nothing to do with race at all, like the relationship of the murderer to the victim.

  47. Roket said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:03

    I wonder if Mr. Hoven factored in the number of white people, who can afford most excellent lawyers, that have killed black people but got off scot free? Or does this not count?

  48. tb said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:06

    Time to drag out the DVDs for a double feature with Wages of Fear and let my nerves fray like a cheap dish towel.

    Yes! And see Sorcerer, the 70′s remake of WOF- it’s actually one of the better remakes ever, once you accept the Vangelis soundtrack. The bridge-crossing sequence is wonderful- you won’t know whether to laugh or barf.

  49. Gary Ruppert said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:16

    The fact is, the chances your phone calls and mail will be monitored by your mother are 48.6 times greater in the Heartland, where we know our place and there are no black people because they are allergic to snow. However, mothers can also get dirty briefs their very whitest, which is something you lie-berals won’t understand because you’re too busy not hating black people.

  50. pedestrian said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:27

    You are 22 times more likely to die in a car than in an airplane. For that reason, I always fly to the supermarket. Unfortunately, the supermarket does not have a landing strip, so this does require some pharmaceutical assistance.

  51. PeeJ said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:29

    Oh! Those zany wingnuts!

    I *was* going to go to an Obama rally but now I’m afeard. It’s far too likely he’ll murder me if I were to actually meet him or something.

  52. Satan's Dirty Underwear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:32

    J’accuse!

  53. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:36

    Scaife on cue:

    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_559659.html

    Does all this mean I’m ready to come out and recommend that our Democrat readers choose Sen. Clinton in Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary?

    No — not yet, anyway. In fairness, we at the Trib want to hear Sen. Barack Obama’s answers to some of the same questions and to others before we make that decision.

    But it does mean that I have a very different impression of Hillary Clinton today than before last Tuesday’s meeting — and it’s a very favorable one indeed.

  54. pedestrian said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:38

    If you have the good fortune to be black in America (although for statistical purposes we can always assume you are not) then you are infinity times more likely to be bombed by your own government

  55. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    March 30, 2008 at 19:50

    Ahh, RIchard Mellon Scaife is for Hillary? I’m totally changing my mind!

  56. WereBear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:17

    I know the odds of me wanting to murder the idiot who wrote this, in the unlikely event I would meet him.

  57. owlbear1 said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:26

    Fats Durston said,

    March 30, 2008 at 16:40

    The chance that a high-ranking participant in the corporate world has stolen billions of dollars is 1.7 in 93. The chance that this person is black is .000034 in 10014. You should thus fear Whitey when it comes to felony-level thefts.

    What?

    That’s not criminal activity?

    Nevermind.

    One steals your wallet the other your retirement.

  58. Tim (the Other One) said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:29

    Is that a Leonard Cohen album cover ?

  59. Tim (the Other One) said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:33

    “once you accept the Vangelis soundtrack. ”

    Tall order there.Why are there bumble bees in my 5.1 ?

  60. mikey said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:36

    Scaife is for an endless, bloody, ugly democratic primary season, a divisive and bruising convention floor fight and permanently hurt feelings and angry voters.

    Scaife is for dems staying home in november. Scaife is for dems expressing their anger and distaste by voting for Nader in november. Scaife is for dems expressing their anger and outrage at the behavior of the nominee by registering a protest vote for McCain in november.

    Scaife is part of the machinery of the “permanent republican majority” we used to hear so much about until they actually got to demonstrate what a historically disastrous clusterfuck it turned out to be.

    Scaife is for anything that keeps the bush/cheney policies in place. He’s HAPPY with the bush/cheney policies. They are HIS policies.

    So go ahead and believe anything Scaife or Limbaugh or any of these other hardcore neocon corporatist racist warmongers say. Sure.

    Great idea…

    mikey

  61. g said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:39

    Scaife is delighted HIllary is sitting down with him, too. And she doesn’t have the judgement or the moral strength not to.

    The guy shelled out money to smear her, personally, with the most vile accusations. That’s pure evil. And she’s sitting down with him.

    What does that say about her judgement? Would she sit down with today’s version of the 1980′s Saddam Hussein? She sure would.

  62. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:43

    So go ahead and believe anything Scaife or Limbaugh or any of these other hardcore neocon corporatist racist warmongers say. Sure.

    I don’t think anyone here is going to take Scaife at his word; those words seem to me to serve the purposes outlined in your previous paragraphs given that the math says HIllary can’t win.

  63. Satan's Dirty Underwear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:45

    But she won’t meet with despots and tyrants which shows that she is so much stronger on foreign policy than the darkie fella.

    What’s wrong with this picture?

  64. Snorghagen said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:49

    I don’t know why everyone is so down on Hoven. I find that Hovenistic threat calculations greatly increase my sense of well-being.

    For example, not one single city full of white people has ever been vaporized by one of them A-bombs, therefore white people need not worry about nuclear weapons. Let me tell you, that’s a big burden of needless fear lifted off my broad white shoulders.

    Things get even better when I calculate risk based entirely on my own experiences. Since I personally have never been squashed to a bloody pulp by a speeding locomotive, I can now sit on the railroad tracks and pick my nose to my heart’s content, without any undue anxiety when I begin to notice the tracks vibrating. Thanks, Mr. H!

    ——————————

    (sarcasm mode off)

    And fuck Hillary. She bleated to the Washington Post yesterday about how she plans to fuck up the convention…

    This is getting ridiculous. I’ll certainly still vote for whoever the Dems nominate, but the Clintons have fucking disgraced themselves with this kind of crap.

  65. mikey said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:52

    I don’t think anyone here is going to take Scaife at his word

    You’re probably right about that. I guess I should be hollering at the press and pundits who will report it disingenuously. Just like Maliki is a great, courageous statesmen for taking on the militias in the south. It’s like it’s always opposite day in the media.

    Or maybe they have a secret contest where the reporter or pundit that can go an entire year without offering one single honest assessment wins some kind of prize…

    mikey

  66. slippy hussein toad said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:53

    I really wish racists would just admit to being racists rather than trying to use science and statistics to validate their bigotry. This is actually more offensive to me.

    I’m reminded of phrenologists trying to make their knuckle-dragging racism measurable by charting head lumps.

    This was back in the 19th century, when people were fucking ignorant about biology.

  67. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:57

    This is getting ridiculous. I’ll certainly still vote for whoever the Dems nominate, but the Clintons have fucking disgraced themselves with this kind of crap.

    Agreed (I said the same back when Edwards dropped out and I switched my support to Obama, but now I’ll also say that I’ll need an industrial strength clothespin on my nose to vote for Hillary in November), and agreed.

  68. slippy hussein toad said,

    March 30, 2008 at 20:58

    Teh Clinton Charm Offensive Marches Onward.

    Here’s an illustrative quote from a conventioneer posted on DKos:

    The Clinton camp had announced that they were targeting the 23rd district for credentials challenges and, by god, that’s what they did.

    By the end, the Clinton folks were willing — hell, eager — to throw out not just random individuals but the entire delegation of 2 precincts. (So much for voter enfranchisement, eh, Hills?)

    The protest process was tailor-made for alienating committed voters, wearing them out to the point where they would drop out. By the end of the night, the convention floor was abuzz with tired, pissed-off voters who now hate Hillary with the fire of a thousand suns.

    Good jorb, there, eh!

  69. Satan's Dirty Underwear said,

    March 30, 2008 at 21:20

    [...] phrenologists [...] This was back in the 19th century, when people were fucking ignorant about biology.

    Ahem. Can you say “creationism?”

  70. owlbear1 said,

    March 30, 2008 at 21:40

    Shorter Randall:

    See, this is how afraid I am. See? I am THAT afraid! SEE HOW AFRAID I AM!?

    CAN YOU TELL I’M AFRAID???

    WANT A FUCKING CHART!!?!?

  71. Ceiling Cat said,

    March 30, 2008 at 21:55

    Isee yr siinz. Randul

    Bad Kittuy.

  72. slippy hussein toad said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:07

    Ahem. Can you say “creationism?”Yeah. You kinda got me there. I don’t know how to explain that one except that some people don’t even know when they’re beaten.

    Of course, our healthcare system being based on creationism would be about as good as the one we have today based on capitalism.

  73. Arky The Islahomobamaist said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:08

    At last, Bob Allen is vindicated!

  74. J— said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:12

    Is that a Leonard Cohen album cover?

    When I was a little kid, Cohen’s Songs of Leonard Cohen used to scare me.

  75. Arky The Islahomobamaist said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:18

    In 1994, AP reported that the stats on homicide showed that 80% of murder victims were killed by a family member or acquaintance.

    Um … er … those figures are probably for black people.

    But you know what? If a bunch of buck-toothed inbreds read the findings of math wizard Hoven and decide to cancel their vacation to D.C. as a result that’s just peachy. It’s not even April and already I’m sick of:

    1. Confused people from BFE, OK, standing between me and the train I need to catch chanting “Which way do we go? Which way do we go?”

    2. Hairy eyeball from said visitors.

    3. The D.C. tourism board which clearly does a rotten job of preparing people for the fact that D.C. could only get more diverse if aliens landed and yes, the brown people are allowed to roam around at will.

  76. Red said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:18

    Gary, the fact is, here in The Heartland, the “good moral character” of whites includes daughter-raping, animal-fucking, parishioner-molesting, serial-killing, insurance-fraud-scheming, drunk-driving, bank-robbing, meth-making, child-neglecting, shop-lifting, gay-bashing, black-lynching, cop-shooting, and general shitfaced beer-breathed shouting of “Wuuht didjo say ta me, boay?!” behavior that I’m sure you have come to love as much as I do.

    Yes, folks, it’s just fucking awesome here in “The Heartland”.

    A-fucking-men.

    Also:

    More than most modern political figures, Sen. Clinton has been criticized regularly, often harshly, by the Trib. We disagreed with many of her policies and her actions in the past. We still disagree with some of her proposals.

    Didn’t Scaife essentially accuse Hillary of murdering Vince Foster? If that’s the kind of help you’re taking, you’ve already lost.

  77. SomeNYGuy said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:25

    And see Sorcerer, the 70’s remake of WOF

    I will not, and you can’t make me. My home is a Friedkin- free zone. (Also a Vangelis-free zone, but I’m not as doctrinaire about it.)

  78. Righteous Bubba said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:29

    Sorcerer’s decent. And the soundtrack was Tangerine Dream.

  79. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:36

    In 1994, AP reported that the stats on homicide showed that 80% of murder victims were killed by a family member or acquaintance.

    Um … er … those figures are probably for black people.

    No, they weren’t, though they were compiled from statistics from a number of urban counties, which may mean that blacks were overrepresented in the sample. But you can’t tell from the numbers offered in the article how many of the victims and perps are black. Clearly not all are, since the study noted that in all spousal murders, 2/3 of the time it’s husband killing wife while in black spousal murders, it’s 53% husband killing wife vs 47% wife killing husband.

    Just sayin’.

  80. tb said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:52

    I will not, and you can’t make me. My home is a Friedkin- free zone.

    What! I realize he’s a Republican, but shit, if I remember correctly Clouzot himself semi-collaborated with the Nazis. You can’t just refuse to watch something because the director’s an asshole. You’d never watch another movie.

  81. Arky The Islahomobamaist said,

    March 30, 2008 at 22:53

    Sorry Jennifer, I should have put snark tags on that last one.

    I was going to look up the figures for murder but I saw your post. The fact that you’re far more likely to be killed, assaulted, robbed etc by someone you know, rather than a random person is after two seconds of reflection is a bit of a no-brainer, which is why Mr. Hoven wouldn’t think of such a thing.

    Here, by the way is the FBI’s 2006 data for murder circumstances by relationship.

  82. SomeNYGuy said,

    March 30, 2008 at 23:07

    What! I realize he’s a Republican, but shit, if I remember correctly Clouzot himself semi-collaborated with the Nazis. You can’t just refuse to watch something because the director’s an asshole. You’d never watch another movie.

    It’s not political, it’s aesthetic. I hate his movies. Even The French Connection (imho) is a handful of exciting setpieces surrounded by impenetrable swill.

  83. Jennifer said,

    March 30, 2008 at 23:23

    Arky – thanks for the link, it seems to reinforce the info in the article I found, a ratio of about 80% of (solved and prosecuted) murders being committed by people known to the victim.

  84. Chairman Meow said,

    March 30, 2008 at 23:23

    I didn’t realise Inspector Clouzot made movies! How interesting.

    :D

  85. Rugged in Montana said,

    March 30, 2008 at 23:36

    Dark skinned people are wiley. There aren’t any in Montana……in the daylight. However, they seem to move amongst the shadows, like the Islamosexuals that haunt the area next to my garage. No matter how many times I try to catch them, they always manage to be “somewhere else” other than where I’m doing the catching. I know they’re out there, I can hear them shuffling out there like zombies….but man are they fast when I open the door……….ZOOM!………they just disappear like ghosts. Still, I know they’re out there, dangerous monsters that are trying to empty me of my essence.

  86. tb said,

    March 30, 2008 at 23:44

    I hate his movies. Even The French Connection (imho) is a handful of exciting setpieces surrounded by impenetrable swill.

    OK, if that’s what you think of FC, you should probably stay away from Sorcerer. I’m still trying to get my head around this “worse than Vangelis” thing though…

  87. Matt McMahon said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:11

    All true Patriotic Americans believe that gang members should be killed. Here in Nebraska their are no street gangs, the scumbags know better. We would shoot them dead in their tracks. I propose a mandatory death penalty for anyone who is a member of a street gang. It worked in Argentina under General Perone, why can’t it work here?

  88. g said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:15

    Here in Nebraska their are no street gangs,

    Sadly
    no

  89. Clif said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:19

    Matt McMahon said,
    March 31, 2008 at 0:11

    All true Patriotic Americans believe that gang members should be killed. Here in Nebraska their are no street gangs

    Yea, except “Matt McMahon,” a tiresome troll whom we’ve seen many times before (“shalom, gentlemen”) and under many other aliases, is in Rhode Island, not Nebraska. Yawn.

  90. Patkin said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:26

    Secondly, spell your idealized Latin American fascists correctly.

    It’s Perón, you gonk.

  91. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:31

    Rode Island?!

    Now it all makes cents!

  92. Jim said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:40

    Dark skinned people are wiley. There aren’t any in Montana

    Of course not. They all ran off to Wyoming in 1929.

  93. Arky The Islahomobamaist said,

    March 31, 2008 at 0:42

    Speaking of Matt McHandjob, I keep reading the title of this blog as “Fun with Fingers.”

    Which is strangely fitting since it is the only type of fun Mr. Hoven ever has.

  94. Mike the Other said,

    March 31, 2008 at 1:55

    “unlike your liberal elite hellholes where you ar…”

    Gary, once again you nail it in reverse, smacking yourself square in the forehead with the ol’ 5lb ballpeen. How much are you getting paid to work for our side, btw ?

    The “liberal hellholes” have the lowest rates of violent crime and homicide, while all the heartlandish execution factories have the highest. Look at the FBI crime stats . For example, the NEast has the lowest homicide rate, while that paragon of godliness, the Southeast has the highest. See…. being librul is healthier. ;)

  95. Mike the Other said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:01

    I see that the lowest rates are for “Other on White”, and “Other on Black” . So to be the safest , go make a black-friend , stand next to her (women are less homicidal), and hang out with a buch of illegal Mexicans, Mongolian yak herders, Indian doctors, et al .

  96. Rugged in Montana said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:04

    Of course not. They all ran off to Wyoming in 1929.

    That makes some sense, actually. Wyoming was the first state to outlaw slavery in 1929, and Montana held out until 1952. I suppose they all settled out there in the space between Lander and Muddy Gap and have stayed there ever since.

  97. Hysterical Woman said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:17

    Here in Nebraska their are no street gangs, the scumbags know better.

    Yeah, it’s too cold up to be out on the streets.

  98. Woodrowfan said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:43

    Nebraska has streets???

  99. Krassen said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:49

    I like stuff like this, facts and numbers….

    For example, since one is more likely to be struck from a lightning than to die in a terrorist attack, I assume that GWOT stands for the Global War On Thunderstorms, correct?

  100. Saul said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:49

    The bottom line is, liberals are gay.

  101. Saul said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:51

    The bottom line is, the bottom line is….

    Think about it, it’ll blow your mind.

  102. mikey said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:51

    Well, the gangs CALL them streets.

    The Farm Road 186 NE Crips just doesn’t have that intimidating ring…

    mikey

  103. Saul said,

    March 31, 2008 at 2:54

    The bottom line is, JUST SHUT UP!

  104. Patkin said,

    March 31, 2008 at 3:16

    You’re the only one talking.

  105. Fozzetti said,

    March 31, 2008 at 5:11

    Are you sure the bathtub guy is dead? Maybe he just had the whirlies from drinking and decided to spend the night in the bathroom, in case he needed to puke. I did once, tho I took a pillow and blanked with me.

  106. transparentgrid.com » Engineer gets crime statistics dead wrong. said,

    March 31, 2008 at 9:29

    [...] and not emotion. Thus Randall Hoven?’s little gem at the inaptly named American Thinker (via Sadly, No!) should give all but the brain dead pause.You should probably first read Hoven’s post, here. [...]

  107. atheist said,

    March 31, 2008 at 12:24

    I did once, tho I took a pillow and blanked with me.

    Wow Fozzetti, I’ve slept on the couch, & even the floor, but never the bathtub…

  108. Paui C said,

    March 31, 2008 at 18:23

    I cannot be bothered to read through all these comments, wonderful as they may be – indeed, I could barely muster the stamina to read through Hoven’s original article. Before I passed out from stupid, however, I did notice something incredibly obvious that somebody in the aforementioned comments has probably already noticed. Which is:

    Holy shit, look how few murderers are “Other”! I am now officially 17.5 times more scared of Whites than I am of everybody else in the entire fucking world. Except for Blacks, of course.

  109. Wieland said,

    March 31, 2008 at 19:23

    Other than someone like Matt McMahon being a complete idiot, note there are gangs in Omaha, every time I’ve visited Nebraska (4 times) I’ve always had a whiff of bodies being buried in the cellar. The state is full of a lot of self-prophesed White People and, other than Big Red’s football team, they have no clue beyond their very sheltered oddly emotionally constipated world.

    As for Randall’s “brilliant” analysis, I took a look at the numbers and realized white people don’t need to fear the Schwartzes as a white person is far more likely to be killed by one of his own than a Black. Further numbers, here http://transparentgrid.com/2008/03/31/engineer-gets-crime-statistics-dead-wrong/.

  110. milligence said,

    March 31, 2008 at 21:06

    the math here is bizarre

    5/100,000 are murderers
    3.5/100,000 are white murderers
    19.7/100,000 are black murderers

    5 – 3.5 = 1.5
    1.5 -19.7 = -18.2

    18.2/100,000 are INVISIBLE BLACK NINJA MURDERERS! or they’re made of anti matter. Or perhaps something more sinister is at work (or at play):

    Shouldn’t that mean you should be 7/5 x as afraid of the white people you see as of black people you can see? And since you can’t see the INVISIBLE BLACK NINJA MURDERERS and the result is actually in the negative, that means you should be their kid’s godparent. I get confused by all the double negatives. That’s something racists seem to understand those better. They seem so confident of their opinions.

  111. Dan Dune said,

    April 3, 2008 at 21:45

    milligence…

    I briefly looked over what you wrote, I believe you missed the part where it said “19.7 OF 100,000″ That means 19.7 of 100,000 blacks, and 3.5 of 100,000 whites. There are differences for sure.

    Some other stats are blacks are more likely to be in prison. 3,042 of 100,000 compared to 487 for whites. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

    I’m sure there has been a red-neck Bubba behind some of those cases of blacks sitting in jail; but not for the vast majority. Plus you have to remember that blacks are the primary victims of black crime. So it is imperative for society to tackle this vicious cycle of crime in the black community, not so much for whites, but for blacks….

  112. Ed Wallis said,

    April 4, 2008 at 0:25

    What a shame the author here can’t quite reason through the argument for all the juvenile sarcasm…try learning from a well-thought-through rebuttal:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/04/reaction_to_typical_white_fact.html

  113. Snorghagen said,

    April 4, 2008 at 1:16

    What a shame the author here can’t quite reason through the argument for all the juvenile sarcasm…

    Juvenile sarcasm? Here?

  114. bob tillman said,

    April 4, 2008 at 16:35

    I love the way most of the liberals attacked the American Thinker article,claiming it is nothing more than racist talk from right wingers.

    Liberals don’t fear people from other races,they treat all people the same. This Is nothing but a lie.

    Why is it in one of the most liberal cities in the nation Boston do we have a black innercity and rich liberal white enclaves surronding it? Why don’t these rich liberals move into the innercity and live amongst the minority population that they so much claim to love. The property is cheaper and it is very convienant to down town

    The simple fact is white liberal elites would not be caught dead in these areas. Their actions speak louder than their words.

    Let me ask this question to our liberal friends You have a choice of being dropped off at 2am on any major street of any black neighborhood of say Philly, D.C. ,Detroit, Chicago,etc. Or you can be dropped off at the same time on main st of any white suburban town, What do you choose.?

    I know the answer and so do you. You choose the white suburban st.

    Common sense does not equal racism.

  115. Clif said,

    April 4, 2008 at 20:19

    Let me ask this question to our liberal friends You have a choice of being dropped off at 2am on any major street of any black neighborhood of say Philly, D.C. ,Detroit, Chicago,etc. Or you can be dropped off at the same time on main st of any white suburban town, What do you choose.?

    I wrote the post and I live in a black neighborhood in Washington, D.C. So does that answer your question?

  116. Snorghagen said,

    April 7, 2008 at 7:44

    How strange… I wonder why Bob never replied?

  117. William B. said,

    April 9, 2008 at 17:45

    You really didn’t read Randy Hoven’s article on Americanthinker.com titled “Typical White Fact-Based Reasoning (updated)” and dated March 24, 2008. If you had you would have understood the circumstances under which the statistical data he cites clearly applies.

    Hoven clearly stated the scenario, “…That is, the chance of just any person you see on the street murdering someone this year is about 5 of 100,000 (assuming you see a random sample of people). The same chance of a white person is 3.5 of 100,000. And the same chance for a black person is 19.7 of 100,000. That means a black person is 5.6 times more likely than a white person to be a murderer.”

    But, in typical fashion the response to well though out logic is a non-scientific response that compares the situation Hoven describes with meaningless and random statistics. Your flawed logic and attempts to undermine solid thinking with humorous and unrelated arguments show you are not a thinker, but rather an emotionally driven liberal. Go back to debate school my friend. You lost the argument with Hoven.

    R/
    William

  118. William B. said,

    April 9, 2008 at 17:46

    BTW, My above comment was directed to Clif

  119. Clif said,

    April 9, 2008 at 18:19

    [blockquote]You really didn’t read Randy Hoven’s article on Americanthinker.com titled “Typical White Fact-Based Reasoning (updated)” and dated March 24, 2008. If you had you would have understood the circumstances under which the statistical data he cites clearly applies.[/blockquote]

    Nor did Hoven read or understand my point clearly. Mine was simple. If two events are both extremely improbable, it is silly to distinguish among them because one is slightly more or less probable. In Hoven’s case it was simply a convenient excuse to justify his own racism.

  120. Dan Dune said,

    April 11, 2008 at 5:31

    Sorry Clif,

    I don’t think Hoven is a racist, he’s a truthist.

    If you are white (you never said if you were, you only claimed that you wrote your post in a black neighbourhood in Washington, D.C) you would probably prefer to be dropped off in the white neighbourhood over a black one if you were unfamiliar with the area. If you answer that you’d prefer to be dropped off in the black neighbourhood, most people wouldn’t believe you.

    There is no such thing as a good black neighbourhood. I’ve been all through the US, and every one that is “black” is filled with gangs, dilapidated buildings, violence, drugs, the irresistable urge to look periodically over your shoulder. Telling the truth isn’t racism…

  121. Clif said,

    April 11, 2008 at 7:07

    Dan Dune said,
    April 11, 2008 at 5:31

    There is no such thing as a good black neighbourhood . I’ve been all through the US, and every one that is “black” is filled with gangs, dilapidated buildings, violence, drugs, the irresistable urge to look periodically over your shoulder. Telling the truth isn’t racism…

    Eh, “neighbourhood”? You must be Canadian, Dan. Indeed, it would appear that you’ve gained your extraordinary knowledge of black “neighbourhoods” in the United States from the unique vantage point of somebody who lives in Manitoba Canada and surfs the Internet from a connection at the Interlake School System there.

    That would certainly make you an expert on black “neighbourhoods” in the United States. So, of course, your statement that there are no good black “neighbourhoods” in the United States is a reliable statement of empirical fact rather than, say, a little bit of redneck racism Canadian-style.

    Better yet, you think that whether I’m black or white has an impact on my argument, suggesting that the only reason I might comfortably live in a black neighborhood of Washington, DC is because I’m black. No racism on your part there, Dan, no, not a bit.

  122. Dan Dune said,

    April 12, 2008 at 6:26

    Actually, I’m a dual citizen. And almost all Commonwealth countries will use “neighbourhood”; but your usage of nslookup and google looks quite good on ya, mate. Except I don’t live in the Interlake, I live in Winnipeg.

    Sadly, no…. you’re wrong. I have a very extraordinary knowledge of black neighbourhoods. I grew up in Detroit (which is 90% black) and lived there until I was about 25. My HS graduating class was < 20% white. Plus I’ve traveled extensively through the US. They all look the same. The city and street names change; but they’re all crime-ridden dumps.

    I have to say, I’m not the (white) racist boogey-man you’re always on the lookout for. I think your efforts would be better served looking elsewhere. There is racism in this world, believe me, I’ve experienced it from blacks and hispanics; but I didn’t let their racism drag me down.

    Just like the raging alcoholic that needs help, the first thing he/she needs to do is admit he has a problem. The black community needs to take a look at themselves and first admit they have a problem (instead of always blaming it on whitey) and do something about it. Bill Cosby summed it up quite well in his speech a few years back http://www.blackpast.org/?q=2004-bill-cosby-pound-cake-speech

    Is it racist to say that blacks commit 51.2% of the murders but are about 13% of the population? I don’t think so. It’s a statistical fact. Mr. Hoven gave this link http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/ovracetab.htm to back-up his statements. On the same site, White on Black homicides are 3.2%; but Black on White homicides are 8.8% If you’re truely looking only at “racism” why focus your efforts on looking at white racists?

    I never suggested whether you were black or white has an impact on your argument, you said that. Let’s focus on the ball. You never answered the question of where you’d rather be dropped off at. You only claimed you lived in a black neighbourhood in DC. Is it a bit of racism on your part that because I’m white and only want to point out that there are problems in the black community that I’m only a racist?

  123. Sadly, No! » New Wingnut of the Week: Helen Cadogan said,

    June 29, 2008 at 18:50

    [...] this week’s New Wingnut of the Week, who comes to us by way of The American Thinker, that cesspool of pseudo-intellectual racism which gives free reign to lengthy dissertations on the alleged [...]

Leave a Comment

  • Things of Interest

  • Meta Goodness

  • Clunkers

  • httpbl_stats()